5 ms·

As someone else mentioned, the civil asset forfeiture has surpassed burglary. With that continuing to increase, it might actually be statistically safer to keep

As someone else mentioned, the civil asset forfeiture has surpassed burglary. With that continuing to increase, it might actually be statistically safer to keep it under your bed than at the bank's safety deposit. I guess it depends on a deeper analysis, but with just that info it starts to become comparable.

gowld 5y ago
This is absolutely false. "forfeiture" has surpassed burglary; and most of that is criminal forfeiture, after a conviction, returning stolen property or paying a fine. The biggest single chunk is what Bernie Madoff stole. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-...
- Clubber 5y ago
  Burglary requires breaking and entering. I don't think Madoff did any B&E. the act of breaking and entering a dwelling at night to commit a felony (such as theft) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/burglary https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/burglary
- bpodgursky 5y ago
  This is 100% true. Ignore the downvotes.
gruez 5y ago
>With that continuing to increase, it might actually be statistically safer to keep it under your bed than at the bank's safety deposit. Whether that's true would depend on the false positive rate of civil forfeitures. Even if it's some absurdly high number (eg. 50%), you'd still need 2x as much civil forfeitures than burglaries for the risk to be equal (presumably nobody "deserves" a burglary). Also in theory civil forfeitures can be recovered, if you can provide documentation that the items aren't ill gotten gains. I'm not sure what the recovery rate for burglary is, but I'd imagine that P(assets recovered from civil forfeiture|you are innocent) is much greater than P(assets recovered from burglary).
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  > Even if it's some hilariously high number (eg. 50%) It's plausibly even higher than that. The incentive for civil asset forfeitures is for law enforcement to seize in exactly this sort of "a medium amount of money from a large number of people" type of situation. Because it makes this useless: > Also in theory civil forfeitures can be recovered "I got back my $9000 and all I had to do was pay $25,000 to a lawyer." And when people do the math on that and decide not to pursue it, law enforcement gets to keep the money. Hence the incentive for them to do it.
- Analemma_ 5y ago
  > Also in theory civil forfeitures can be recovered, In theory. It will cost you a shitton of lawyer fees that might exceed the amount you lost, and you can also expect to be constantly harassed by the cops during and after the process, plus forget about ever getting help from them again if you need it.
- syshum 5y ago
  I would say civil forfeiture is nearly 90+ % false... If it was a legit use of government power they would go for the better, more ethical criminal forfeiture where by they prove a person committed a crime and then take the assets related to the crime Civil Asset forfeitures are an end run around the 4th and 5th amendments, and should be viewed as unethical by every reasonable person
- brobdingnagians 5y ago
  It also depends on where you live. Some places have higher rates of burglary than the average, and some much lower. A wealthy individual may have a higher chance of asset seizure, but less for burglary. But again, depends very much on your particular risk profile.
- Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
  > if you can provide documentation that the items aren't ill gotten gains This is just absolutely bonkers. "Innocent until proven guilty" was supposed to be a core tenet of our justice system. The court needs to prove that the money was acquired illegally, not assume it was, and then expect us to prove its innocence. They need to have evidence and a warrant before seizing. The "Second Amendment" types often claim that the Second Amendment protects the First Amendment. Well shouldn't it also enforce the Fourth Amendment?
MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
Civil Asset forfeiture also includes things like when Bernie Madoffs assets were seized and sent back to the investors which was $1.7 billion listed in an article on another person's comment. So it's not 100% comprised of "honest" citizens just getting screwed.
- bpodgursky 5y ago
  The terms are confused a lot, but "Assert Forfeiture" includes seizing assets from Madoff. "Civil Asset Forfeiture" is the Really Bad kind people complain about. Only "Assert Forfeiture" overall is a larger volume than theft, because yes it includes recuperation from white-collar crime. The money from civil kind is much smaller (not that it excuses it).

gowld 5y ago

This is absolutely false. "forfeiture" has surpassed burglary; and most of that is criminal forfeiture, after a conviction, returning stolen property or paying a fine. The biggest single chunk is what Bernie Madoff stole. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-...

Clubber 5y ago
Burglary requires breaking and entering. I don't think Madoff did any B&E. the act of breaking and entering a dwelling at night to commit a felony (such as theft) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/burglary https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/burglary
bpodgursky 5y ago
This is 100% true. Ignore the downvotes.

gruez 5y ago

>With that continuing to increase, it might actually be statistically safer to keep it under your bed than at the bank's safety deposit. Whether that's true would depend on the false positive rate of civil forfeitures. Even if it's some absurdly high number (eg. 50%), you'd still need 2x as much civil forfeitures than burglaries for the risk to be equal (presumably nobody "deserves" a burglary). Also in theory civil forfeitures can be recovered, if you can provide documentation that the items aren't ill gotten gains. I'm not sure what the recovery rate for burglary is, but I'd imagine that P(assets recovered from civil forfeiture|you are innocent) is much greater than P(assets recovered from burglary).

AnthonyMouse 5y ago
> Even if it's some hilariously high number (eg. 50%) It's plausibly even higher than that. The incentive for civil asset forfeitures is for law enforcement to seize in exactly this sort of "a medium amount of money from a large number of people" type of situation. Because it makes this useless: > Also in theory civil forfeitures can be recovered "I got back my $9000 and all I had to do was pay $25,000 to a lawyer." And when people do the math on that and decide not to pursue it, law enforcement gets to keep the money. Hence the incentive for them to do it.
Analemma_ 5y ago
> Also in theory civil forfeitures can be recovered, In theory. It will cost you a shitton of lawyer fees that might exceed the amount you lost, and you can also expect to be constantly harassed by the cops during and after the process, plus forget about ever getting help from them again if you need it.
syshum 5y ago
I would say civil forfeiture is nearly 90+ % false... If it was a legit use of government power they would go for the better, more ethical criminal forfeiture where by they prove a person committed a crime and then take the assets related to the crime Civil Asset forfeitures are an end run around the 4th and 5th amendments, and should be viewed as unethical by every reasonable person
brobdingnagians 5y ago
It also depends on where you live. Some places have higher rates of burglary than the average, and some much lower. A wealthy individual may have a higher chance of asset seizure, but less for burglary. But again, depends very much on your particular risk profile.
Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
> if you can provide documentation that the items aren't ill gotten gains This is just absolutely bonkers. "Innocent until proven guilty" was supposed to be a core tenet of our justice system. The court needs to prove that the money was acquired illegally, not assume it was, and then expect us to prove its innocence. They need to have evidence and a warrant before seizing. The "Second Amendment" types often claim that the Second Amendment protects the First Amendment. Well shouldn't it also enforce the Fourth Amendment?

MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago

Civil Asset forfeiture also includes things like when Bernie Madoffs assets were seized and sent back to the investors which was $1.7 billion listed in an article on another person's comment. So it's not 100% comprised of "honest" citizens just getting screwed.

bpodgursky 5y ago
The terms are confused a lot, but "Assert Forfeiture" includes seizing assets from Madoff. "Civil Asset Forfeiture" is the Really Bad kind people complain about. Only "Assert Forfeiture" overall is a larger volume than theft, because yes it includes recuperation from white-collar crime. The money from civil kind is much smaller (not that it excuses it).